Prep101 - Free Writing Sample Feedback

[bored]

Political decisions always require careful deliberation.

 

Describe a specific situation in which a political decision might not require careful deliberation. Discuss what you think determines whether or not political decisions require careful deliberation.

 

Political decisions always require careful deliberation.

 

Describe a specific situation in which a political decision might not require careful deliberation. Discuss what you think determines whether or not political decisions require careful deliberation.

 

 

"If you want something, you must go and get it yourself". This is true of most situations. However, in politics, one must ensure a more careful deliberation to allow for their wants to come into play. A politician, if has something that they would like to be seen change, then this person must themselves ensure that it occurs. In modern politics, this usually occurs via bribing. The politician for example if he or she wants to be reelected, will usualyl promise the population somehting of their desire to be elected. This ensures that they will vote for the politician and the politition will inturn give the people what they voted him or her for. If a politician wants to see a change being occured, he or she will usually need to convience others so that when a vote on the topic does come, it is in their favour. These are the only way a political decision is able to come to light. If a politician does not use careful deliberation to give light to their decisions, then their decisions or wants will usually fade away with time.

 

The case of a bribing politition only occurs in modern politics because we live in a democretic society. in this society, the representatives are usually elected by the will of the people, and any change that the representative or politician wants to see occuring must be again by the will of the people. Going against the will of the people is almsot impossible becuase they will simply elect someone else, for that reason a polition has to resort to bribing the population. In ancient times however, one man usually ruled over everyone. This king was the person everyone looked to for answers and for decisions. For this king to bring about a change in society is a simple speech that must be given and everyone would be in support of this king, becuase the people knew that the king was of higher race and closer to god then the rest of the population. The king holds this power and for that reason he or she is able to bring about change without any deleberation from their end. THey only need to give a speech and bring out their ideas to others. No matter how bad these ideas, they will usually be embraced by the population. An example is of King Turksleaga, who resided near the sehara desert in africa during the 500s BC. Historians and Archeological research tell us that this king told his population to never take a shower or a bath because it is the will of the gods. The actual reason was that there was a drought going on and the king wanted the water for him and his family to stay clean. Even then the population followed every word of their king and the life expetency of the population was reduced down to around 30 years. The king had only express his wants and the population followed.

 

Wether if a political decision requires delebretion from a politician or not depends on the type of society that the politician lives in. If the politician lives in a totalitarion society like that of king Turksleaga of the sahara desert region during the 500s BC, then this politician will get what he or she wants without any delebration required. This comes from the belief of the population that the king is of a higer race then themselves and is closer to god then they are themselves. Therefore, this on its own serves as a delebration. The king however did not have to bring this forward, it is a cherecteristic of a population of people that live in a totalitarion government. they bevieve that their king is of a higher race. In modern democretic societies, we do not believe anything of the sort about our politicians. We believe that they are normal human beings elected by ourselves, therefore for a change or a decision of this politions to come to light will always require deleberation.

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay Submitted by: Pearl.4

 

Government and politicians come hand and hand this is a bit too obvious and the phrasing is awkward. to determine what is best for their Country. Political decisions in most instances require long debate and time before any stances have grammar been made on the issue. Today in the Canadian government, Primer Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party have made known their idea of changing the pension plan to the public servants of Canada. This is seen in the news and in papers all of Canada grammar. Although nothing has been concretely decided the next steps require careful critique from the other parties. This issue will continue to be deliberated until a consensus has been decided. This example would work but is not focused enough on addressing the writing task. You need to discuss why they need to be careful. Discuss the potential ramifications of making a hasty decision.

 

In other instances the government must make quick decisions without careful deliberation. Around the 1970's a Quebec separatist group called the FLQ had kidnapped a political official and became a public threat to Canada. The government at the time lead by Pierre Elliot Trudeu had decided after only a short time to initiate the War Measures Act. This Act stripped the rights of Canadian citizens which allowed police to arrest anyone who was under suspicion. This decision to this day is critiqued by many but is an example of political decisions that did not take the time to be carefully analysed. Awkward phrasing. This example is good and it was explained more thoroughly than your previous example. However, another line or two would have made it excellent.

 

Political decisions occur everyday in all countries around the world. What determines which grammar a decision does not require careful deliberation is if the country and its citizen are in threat grammar and there is no time to carefully analyse the decision. In the example with the FLQ crisis of Canada the government needed to act quickly to ensure the safety of the country. As for the current issue on pensions there is no pressing need to determine a decision. Your principle is good but needs to be better phrased. You also need more elaboration because your argument is sparse. You need more discussion to create a clear separation between your examples.

 

Overall Mark: 3.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately an O )

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 3.5 Supporting task is somewhat addressed. Refuting task is well addressed. Resolution task is weakly addressed.

Depth: 4

Focus and coherence: 3.5

Grammar and vocabulary: 2.5 Several grammatical errors and poor phrasing.

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by DaKirbster

 

Good politics are the foundation of any functioning society. Often, political decisions must be made where the choice most beneficial to the society is not clear. In such cases, the governing body must put in careful deliberation to ensure that the most optimal decision is made. It is important that the effort is put in to make the best choice because any decision that the politicians make will have a wide impact on the society. For example, in the early 20th century Canada made the decision to ban alcohol without carefully considering the outcome. From this ban arose a large and dangerous bootlegging industry, and an increase in organized crime that, along with the new law itself, affected people across the nation. This might have been avoided had more careful deliberation been put into the decision.

Excellent.

 

However, not all political decisions require extensive consideration. This is the case when there is clearly one choice that is the most beneficial for the society. This belongs in the resolution paragraph. For example, in the beginning of civilisation, it was decided that those who harmed society through such crimes as murder would be punished for their actions. The decision to give punishments to murderers did not, and should never, require deep consideration as murder is clearly wrong.

This example is weak because it lacks depth and is too simplistic.

 

Ultimately, whether or not a poltical decision merits careful consideration depends upon the ambiguity of the choices. This is ambiguous and vague. You want to lay out clear conditions as to when political decisions require careful deliberation and when they do not. If one option is clearly beneficial political situations are rarely simple enough to have one clearly beneficial option, it is not necessary to waste time deciding over it. Otherwise, careful deliberation should be applied to political decisions to ensure the right choice is made as its impacts are often far-reaching. It was not clear that banning alcohol was a good choice the haste of the government to try to ban alcohol suggests that it was clear for them does it not?; the government tried it in haste without careful deliberation and it backfired. Conversely, deciding to punish those who harm society is a clear-cut choice that required little deliberation. Regardless, it is important that any political decision has society's best interests at heart.

- The resolution principle lacks depth and is ambiguous.

- Your refuting example is weak and that in turn affects the quality of your arguments in the resolution paragraph.

 

Overall Mark: 2.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a M)

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 2.5 Supporting task is completely addressed. Refuting task is poorly addressed. Resolution task is weakly addressed.

Depth: 2.5 Ideas lack depth and are too simplistic.

Focus and coherence: 3.5

Grammar and vocabulary: 4

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by bored

 

"If you want something, you must go and get it yourself". This is not effective because it doesn't tie in well with the prompt. This is true of most situations. However, in politics, one must ensure a more careful deliberation to allow for their wants to come into play. Awkward phrasing A politician, if has something grammar that they would like to be seen change grammar, then this person must themselves ensure that it occurs. How does this relate to the writing task? In modern politics, this usually occurs via bribing. The politician for example if he or she wants to be reelected, will usualyl promise the population somehting of their desire to be elected. This ensures that they will vote for the politician and the politition will inturn give the people what they voted him or her for. If a politician wants to see a change being occured, he or she will usually need to convience others so that when a vote on the topic does come, it is in their favour. These are the only way a political decision is able to come to light. If a politician does not use careful deliberation to give light to their decisions, then their decisions or wants will usually fade away with time.

This paragraph is off topic and does not address the writing task. The grammar and spelling are significant issues.

 

The case of a bribing politition only occurs in modern politics because we live in a democretic society. in this society, the representatives are usually elected by the will of the people, and any change that the representative or politician wants to see occuring must be again by the will of the people. Going against the will of the people is almsot impossible becuase they will simply elect someone else, for that reason a polition has to resort to bribing the population. In ancient times however, one man usually ruled over everyone. This king was the person everyone looked to for answers and for decisions. For this king to bring about a change in society is a simple speech that must be given and everyone would be in support of this king, becuase the people knew that the king was of higher race and closer to god then the rest of the population. The king holds this power and for that reason he or she is able to bring about change without any deleberation from their end. THey only need to give a speech and bring out their ideas to others. No matter how bad these ideas, they will usually be embraced by the population. An example is of King Turksleaga, who resided near the sehara desert in africa during the 500s BC. Historians and Archeological research tell us that this king told his population to never take a shower or a bath because it is the will of the gods. The actual reason was that there was a drought going on and the king wanted the water for him and his family to stay clean. Even then the population followed every word of their king and the life expetency of the population was reduced down to around 30 years. The king had only express his wants and the population followed.

There are some parts of this paragraph that are somewhat related to addressing the writing task. However, most of the discussion is off-topic and very unfocused. Grammar and spelling again are significant problems.

 

Wether if a political decision requires delebretion from a politician or not depends on the type of society that the politician lives in. This is a good resolution principle. If the politician lives in a totalitarion society like that of king Turksleaga of the sahara desert region during the 500s BC, then this politician will get what he or she wants without any delebration required. This comes from the belief of the population that the king is of a higer race then themselves and is closer to god then they are themselves. Good. Therefore, this on its own serves as a delebration. This is unnecessary The king however did not have to bring this forward, it is a cherecteristic of a population of people that live in a totalitarion government. they bevieve that their king is of a higher race. ?? In modern democretic societies, we do not believe anything of the sort about our politicians. We believe that they are normal human beings elected by ourselves, therefore for a change or a decision of this politions to come to light will always require deleberation. Your application of the resolution principle to your supporting idea needs work.

 

Overall Mark: 1.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a K )

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 1.5 Supporting task is not addressed. Refuting task is weakly addressed. Resolution task is somewhat addressed.

Depth: 2.5

Focus and coherence: 2 Ideas and arguments need to be focused on addressing the writing tasks.

Grammar and vocabulary: 1 Poor grammar and spelling.

[bored]

Essay submitted by bored

 

"If you want something, you must go and get it yourself". This is not effective because it doesn't tie in well with the prompt. This is true of most situations. However, in politics, one must ensure a more careful deliberation to allow for their wants to come into play. Awkward phrasing A politician, if has something grammar that they would like to be seen change grammar, then this person must themselves ensure that it occurs. How does this relate to the writing task? In modern politics, this usually occurs via bribing. The politician for example if he or she wants to be reelected, will usualyl promise the population somehting of their desire to be elected. This ensures that they will vote for the politician and the politition will inturn give the people what they voted him or her for. If a politician wants to see a change being occured, he or she will usually need to convience others so that when a vote on the topic does come, it is in their favour. These are the only way a political decision is able to come to light. If a politician does not use careful deliberation to give light to their decisions, then their decisions or wants will usually fade away with time.

This paragraph is off topic and does not address the writing task. The grammar and spelling are significant issues.

 

The case of a bribing politition only occurs in modern politics because we live in a democretic society. in this society, the representatives are usually elected by the will of the people, and any change that the representative or politician wants to see occuring must be again by the will of the people. Going against the will of the people is almsot impossible becuase they will simply elect someone else, for that reason a polition has to resort to bribing the population. In ancient times however, one man usually ruled over everyone. This king was the person everyone looked to for answers and for decisions. For this king to bring about a change in society is a simple speech that must be given and everyone would be in support of this king, becuase the people knew that the king was of higher race and closer to god then the rest of the population. The king holds this power and for that reason he or she is able to bring about change without any deleberation from their end. THey only need to give a speech and bring out their ideas to others. No matter how bad these ideas, they will usually be embraced by the population. An example is of King Turksleaga, who resided near the sehara desert in africa during the 500s BC. Historians and Archeological research tell us that this king told his population to never take a shower or a bath because it is the will of the gods. The actual reason was that there was a drought going on and the king wanted the water for him and his family to stay clean. Even then the population followed every word of their king and the life expetency of the population was reduced down to around 30 years. The king had only express his wants and the population followed.

There are some parts of this paragraph that are somewhat related to addressing the writing task. However, most of the discussion is off-topic and very unfocused. Grammar and spelling again are significant problems.

 

Wether if a political decision requires delebretion from a politician or not depends on the type of society that the politician lives in. This is a good resolution principle. If the politician lives in a totalitarion society like that of king Turksleaga of the sahara desert region during the 500s BC, then this politician will get what he or she wants without any delebration required. This comes from the belief of the population that the king is of a higer race then themselves and is closer to god then they are themselves. Good. Therefore, this on its own serves as a delebration. This is unnecessary The king however did not have to bring this forward, it is a cherecteristic of a population of people that live in a totalitarion government. they bevieve that their king is of a higher race. ?? In modern democretic societies, we do not believe anything of the sort about our politicians. We believe that they are normal human beings elected by ourselves, therefore for a change or a decision of this politions to come to light will always require deleberation. Your application of the resolution principle to your supporting idea needs work.

 

Overall Mark: 1.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a K )

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 1.5 Supporting task is not addressed. Refuting task is weakly addressed. Resolution task is somewhat addressed.

Depth: 2.5

Focus and coherence: 2 Ideas and arguments need to be focused on addressing the writing tasks.

Grammar and vocabulary: 1 Poor grammar and spelling.

 

 

How is paragraph one off topic? Am I not giving an example of when a politician uses careful deliberation to get their decision accomplished???

 

Am I perhaps not understanding the prompt? the way I see it is "if a politician wants to have his or her ideas come into existence, then they must deliberately give rise to those decisions.

 

so in my first paragraph, I wanted to explain how a politician in a democracy has to work hard to get his ideas into existence.

 

in my second paragraph, I explain how a politician does not need to do this because they are kings.

 

in my third paragraph, I explain that politicians always need to use careful delibretion to get their decisions to come into existance. A king however has to work less at it because the people see the king as of a higher race of being or a messenger of god.

 

thanks again for your inputs and grading

 

edit: after reading the other essays on the same topic, perhaps I didn't understood the prompt properly and just turned it into something that I did understand and wrote my essay on that. Do you agree?

[RaymondPrep101]

I think you did misunderstand what careful deliberation means. Doing something deliberately is different than doing something with careful deliberation. Careful deliberation means that the decision was fully thought out, debated, planned, reflected upon, etc.

 

In paragraph 1, you don't give an example of careful deliberation.

In paragraph 2 your example works because the king has absolute authority and therefore doesn't need to deliberate over his decisions.

In paragraph 3, you discuss how Kings don't need to deliberate. Within this paragraph, your discussion of elected politicians is confusing and I think it is confusing because of the misunderstanding.

 

Hope that helps.

[bored]

I think you did misunderstand what careful deliberation means. Doing something deliberately is different than doing something with careful deliberation. Careful deliberation means that the decision was fully thought out, debated, planned, reflected upon, etc.

 

In paragraph 1, you don't give an example of careful deliberation.

In paragraph 2 your example works because the king has absolute authority and therefore doesn't need to deliberate over his decisions.

In paragraph 3, you discuss how Kings don't need to deliberate. Within this paragraph, your discussion of elected politicians is confusing and I think it is confusing because of the misunderstanding.

 

Hope that helps.

 

got it thanks!

[RaymondPrep101]

Discovery of the truth leads to justice.

 

Describe a specific situation in which justice might not result from discovery of the truth. Discuss what you think determines whether or not truth leads to justice.

Instructions

In 30 minutes, write an essay for the prompt and instructions above and post your essay in this thread.

 

Use the Notepad accessory on your computer so word processing functions are turned off.

 

Note: Do not read other essays replying to this prompt on the Forum until after you have written and submitted your own essay.

 

Deadline

11:59pm Saturday, February 25.

 

Essays posted after the deadline will not be scored but a new Prompt will be posted on Sunday, February 26.

[medoc]

Thanks for continuing this service and for the feedbacks.

 

In a fast changing world like today, we need to maintain justice to keep the order in the society. Without justice, many will not be punished for the crimes they commit and the society will lose its maintenance of laws and regulations. In order to maintain laws and regulations are followed, we have investigative organizations such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Provincial Police Departments and Integrated Homicide Investigation Team (IHIT). Without the work performed by these organizations, truths behind crimes will not be brought foward to the court system to seek justice. Finding the truth with evidences to support is how a criminal can be punished to establish justice in the society. For example, Pickton case in BC, a serial murderer Robert Pickton was caught in the accusation that he had been killing the women involved in prostitution. A case called mission womens case was launched by the investigative team in BC and they have found evidences of human remains at the Pickton farm, which he owned and operated. If the remains of the victims were not found by investigators at the Pickton farm, justice to those women who had been killed by Pickton wouldn't have been provided. Finding the truth behind any incident that takes place will be allowed to use as an evidence to find justice in the court system.

 

Although, the truth may lead to justice, there are some cases where the truth may not lead to justice. For example, when John Cosby was charged with a first degree murder of his best friend, the court did not believe his plea. He mentioned that the evidences found on his shirt that he wore on the day of the death of his friend was due to him trying to perform CPR on his friend. It may be the case that he had blood from his friend on the shirt he wore, but the court used this as an evidence to give him a sentence of 40 years in jail. When John Cosby came out of jail on a bail 25 years later, he decided to find who killed his friend and escaped the scene. With the police assisting him with the details collected on the crime scene, it took him 5 years to find out who killed his friend. In this case, discovering the truth after 30 years of who killed John's friend, did not bring justice to John since he had spent 25 years in jail for a crime he never committed.

 

In determining whether the truth leads to justice or not, investigative teams play a large role. Finding what exactly took place and reporting the evidences without mistakes will only lead to justice. The evidences from a crime scene will be screened through many departments and the court system decides whether to provide justice by punishing the accused criminal. In my opinion, I feel that discovery of the truth does lead to finding justice since without appropriate evidences based on the truth, justice cannot be found. Without proper evidences to support the truth, criminals like Pickton would have never been charged and may have killed more women during his life time. To maintain order in society and to keep the public following the laws and regulations, truth needs to be found to serve justice and to warn others not to commit crimes.

[Pearl.4]

THANKS!

 

Discovery of the truth leads to justice.

 

 

In today's legal system there are continuous battles to determine the truth. Whether it would be defending a parking ticket or determining whether an accused murderer is guilty or innocent the truth is the foundation in the court of law. In court we believe that the discovery of truth leads to justice. A current issue that has flooded the news and websites is the Shafia family honour killings. Three teenage girls and a woman, the girl's father's first wife, was found dead after drowning in a car that was submerged into a lake. The girls was survived by their father, brother and mother. Day after day new information of the involvement of the father, brother and mother became public. This included recorded telephone messages and earlier situations where the girls had asked for help for fear of their father. After long trials and continuous release of new evidence all three suspects was convicted of murder. Here we see how truth had lead to justice convicting those who are guilty.

 

The legal system and society is not always black and white. There are situations where truth and justice become shaded and blurred. This is the case found with some politicians. In Canada the Conservative Party has been accused and found guilty of illegal spending of government funds. Currently the issue has been held up in court and no sentence has been seen publicly. Information is also harder to find in the news. From the stand point of the citizen there is no justice to be had. The current government is still in power and the issue has been pushed. Here finding truth does not lead to justice.

 

The discovery of truth and the effectiveness to deliver justice is an issue present all over the world. Where the discovery of truth leads to justice is seen in cases where it black and white. These are cases that have concrete evidence such as DNA fingerprinting or witnesses. Where discovery of truth does not lead to justice is when the guilty parties are found in the government. The government finds ways to avoid the situation and uses time as a way to make their citizens to forget. Leaving them to spend our money without the need to think of the repercussions.

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by medoc

 

In a fast changing world like today, we need to maintain justice to keep the order in the society. Good. Without justice, many will not be punished for the crimes they commit and the society will lose its maintenance of laws and regulations. Perhaps a definition of justice would be useful here rather than this general statement. In order to maintain word choice laws and regulations are followed, we have investigative organizations such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Provincial Police Departments and Integrated Homicide Investigation Team (IHIT). Without the work performed by these organizations, truths behind crimes will not be brought foward to the court system to seek justice awkward phrasing. Finding the truth with evidences to support is how a criminal can be punished to establish justice in the society. It takes you too long to set up for your example. Try to keep your introductory statements concise. For example, Pickton case in BC grammar, a serial murderer Robert Pickton was caught in the accusation awkward phrasing that he had been killing the women involved in prostitution. A case called mission womens case was launched by the investigative team in BC and they have found evidences of human remains at the Pickton farm, which he owned and operated. Grammar issues in this sentence. If the remains of the victims were not found by investigators at the Pickton farm, justice to those women who had been killed by Pickton wouldn't have been provided word choice. Finding the truth behind any incident that takes place will be allowed to use as an evidence to find justice in the court system. This sentence has some grammatical problems and the phrasing is not ideal.

 

This example works well. However, more space should be dedicated to expanding the example rather than on the introduction. Furthermore, there are grammatical errors and awkward phrasing that are issues.

 

Although, the truth may lead to justice, there are some cases where the truth may not lead to justice. For example, when John Cosby was charged with the first degree murder of his best friend, the court did not believe his plea. He mentioned that the evidences found on his shirt that he wore on the day of the death of his friend was due to him trying to perform CPR on his friend. It may be the case that he had blood from his friend on the shirt he wore ?, but the court used this as an evidence to give him a sentence of 40 years in jail. When John Cosby came out of jail on a bail 25 years later, he decided to find who killed his friend and escaped the scene. With the police assisting him with the details collected on the crime scene, it took him 5 years to find out who killed his friend. In this case, discovering the truth after 30 years of who killed John's friend, did not bring justice to John since he had spent 25 years in jail for a crime he never committed.

This example is good. The vocabulary is simple and clear but could be stronger in order to improve your writing.

 

In determining whether the truth leads to justice or not, investigative teams play a large role. Finding what exactly took place and reporting the evidences without mistakes will only lead to justice. The evidences from a crime scene will be screened through many departments and the court system decides whether to provide justice by punishing the accused criminal. It takes you too long to get to your resolution principle. These details don't help your argument when it is not clear what the argument is. You should present your resolution principle at the beginning. In my opinion, I feel that discovery of the truth does lead to finding justice since without appropriate evidences based on the truth, justice cannot be found. Without proper evidences to support the truth, criminals like Pickton would have never been charged and may have killed more women during his life time. To maintain order in society and to keep the public following the laws and regulations, truth needs to be found to serve justice and to warn others not to commit crimes.

The resolution task is not addressed here. I suggest going back to basics and reading up on what the purpose of the resolution paragraph is. Then follow the standard template for the resolution paragraph.

 

Overall Mark: 3/6 (Corresponds to approximately a N )

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 3 Supporting task is adequately addressed. Refuting task is adequately addressed. Resolution task is not addressed.

Depth: 4

Focus and coherence: 3.5

Grammar and vocabulary: 3

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by Pearl.4

 

Discovery of the truth leads to justice.

 

In today's legal system there are continuous battles to determine the truth. Good.Whether it would be defending a parking ticket awkward phrasing or determining whether an accused murderer is guilty or innocent the truth is the foundation in the court of law. In court we believe that the discovery of truth leads to justice. A current issue that has flooded the news and websites is the Shafia family honour killings. Three teenage girls and a woman, the girl's father's first wife, were found dead after drowning in a car that was submerged into a lake. The girls were survived by their father, brother and mother. Day after day new information of the involvement of the father, brother and mother became public. This included recorded telephone messages and earlier situations where the girls had asked for help for fear of their father. After long trials and continuous release of new evidence all three suspects was convicted of murder. Here we see how truth had lead to justice convicting those who are guilty.

This example works but is not well explained. The writing style needs improvement and there are several grammatical mistakes.

 

The legal system and society are not always black and white. There are situations where truth and justice become shaded and blurred. This is the case found with some politicians. In Canada the Conservative Party has been accused and found guilty of illegal spending of government funds. Currently the issue has been held up in court and no sentence has been seen publicly. Information is also harder to find in the news. From the stand point of the citizen there is no justice to be had. The current government is still in power and the issue has been pushed. Here finding truth does not lead to justice.

Similar to before, the example could work but the writing style is a problem. The paragraph is more a collection of facts than a cohesive argument. Another problem is that they have simply been accused and the truth has not been established.

 

The discovery of truth and the effectiveness to deliver justice awkward phrasing is an issue present all over the world. Where the discovery of truth leads to justice is seen in cases where it black and white. This is vague and ambiguous. It does not lay out clear conditions. These are cases that have concrete evidence such as DNA fingerprinting or witnesses. Where discovery of truth does not lead to justice is when the guilty parties are found in the government. The government finds ways to avoid the situation and uses time as a way to make their citizens to forget. Leaving them to spend our money without the need to think of the repercussions.

Problems:

- The resolution principle should lay out the conditions of when truth leads to justice or does not lead to justice at the beginning of your paragraph (that means both sides).

- Avoid ambiguous resolution principles. Even with DNA evidence and witnesses, very few cases are simply black and white.

- You need to discuss your examples within the context of your resolution principle

 

When presenting an argument, pretend you are telling a story. Your points should flow logically from one to another and your argument should gradually take shape. You should also pick points that help your argument rather than points that just add more factual information

 

Overall Mark: 2.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a M)

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 2.5 Supporting task is somewhat addressed. Refuting task is weakly addressed. Resolution task is weakly addressed.

Depth: 3

Focus and coherence: 2.5 The focus and coherence of the writing is a problem.

Grammar and vocabulary:3.5

[DaKirbster]

Discovery of the truth leads to justice.

 

Justice is the foundation of society; it instills a sense of security to the general public knowing that wrongdoers will be subject to the penalty of the law. Uncovering indisputable evidence of a wrongdoing is the most practical way to discover the truth. It is the discovery of truth that allows for justice to be brought forward. When the truth behind an injustice is known, society's judicial system is able to assess the wrongdoing and apply the appropriate punishments and rectifications in order to bring justice to the situation. For example, John MacLean was recently sentenced to life in prison for the murder of his wife. This sentence was assigned upon the discovery of the evidence that Mr. MacLean purchased and used the same weapon that was found to have killed his wife. In this case, justice was conceived by the discovery of the truth behind the crime.

 

However, there are some cases when discovery of the truth does not lead to justice. An example of this situation is the infamous case of the murder trial of OJ Simpson. In this case, there was blaring evidence that Simpson was guilty of the murder of his wife, but Simpson's high end litigation team was able to delay the discovery of this truth until the trial was over and Simpson was acquitted. It was not until after the trial that it was clear that Simpson was guilty of murder. Even though the truth was discovered, no justice was had, and Simpson went unpunished.

 

Ultimately, whether or not discovery of the truth leads to justice depends on whether or not the truth is discovered during a time when the crime can be legally punished. In the first example, the evidence was discovered during MacLean's trial and the prosecution was able to use the evidence to convict MacLean and bring justice. In the case of OJ Simpson, the truth was not well known until after Simpson was acquitted, at which point there was little the prosecution could do to convict him and thus no justice came forth. It is important that society works on this flaw such that wrongdoers cannot slip through the gaps. Hopefully, there will come a time when the discovery of truth always leads to justice.

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by DaKirbster

 

Justice is the foundation of society; it instills a sense of security to the general public knowing that wrongdoers will be subject to the penalty of the law. Uncovering indisputable evidence of a wrongdoing is the most practical way to discover the truth. It is the discovery of truth that allows for justice to be brought forward. When the truth behind an injustice is known, society's judicial system is able to assess the wrongdoing and apply the appropriate punishments and rectifications in order to bring justice to the situation. This last line is unnecessary. You should keep your introduction more concise so that you have more time to elaborate on your example. For example, John MacLean was recently sentenced to life in prison for the murder of his wife. This sentence was assigned upon the discovery of the evidence that Mr. MacLean purchased and used the same weapon that was found to have killed his wife. In this case, justice was conceived word choice by the discovery of the truth behind the crime.

This example works but is pretty basic. It lacks depth and needs to be expanded upon.

 

However, there are some cases when discovery of the truth does not lead to justice. An example of this situation is the infamous case of the murder trial of OJ Simpson. In this case, there was blaring word choice evidence that Simpson was guilty of the murder of his wife, but Simpson's high end litigation team was able to delay the discovery of this truth until the trial was over and Simpson was acquitted. It was not until after the trial that it was clear that Simpson was guilty of murder. Even though the truth was discovered, no justice was had, and Simpson went unpunished. I'm not exactly sure if that is how it went down but if it did happen that way then this is a very good example. Just be careful of the facts because this is a well known case and factual errors could hurt an essay.

 

Ultimately, whether or not discovery of the truth leads to justice depends on whether or not the truth is discovered during a time when the crime can be legally punished. In the first example, the evidence was discovered during MacLean's trial and the prosecution was able to use the evidence to convict MacLean and bring justice. In the case of OJ Simpson, the truth was not well known until after Simpson was acquitted, at which point there was little the prosecution could do to convict him and thus no justice came forth. It is important that society works on this flaw such that wrongdoers cannot slip through the gaps. Hopefully, there will come a time when the discovery of truth always leads to justice. This is excellent. One small point that could have helped is the statement that once acquitted, someone cannot be charged with the same crime again.

 

Overall, very well done.

 

Overall Mark: 5.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a S )

Breakdown (out of 6)

Addresses tasks: 5.5 Supporting task is adequately addressed. Refuting task is well addressed. Resolution task is completely addressed.

Depth: 5

Focus and coherence: 5

Grammar and vocabulary: 4.5

[RaymondPrep101]

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

Describe a specific situation in which cooperation might be superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition is superior to cooperation in business and when it is inferior.

 

Instructions

In 30 minutes, write an essay for the prompt and instructions above and post your essay in this thread.

 

Use the Notepad accessory on your computer so word processing functions are turned off.

 

Note: Do not read other essays replying to this prompt on the Forum until after you have written and submitted your own essay.

 

Deadline

11:59pm Thursday, March 1.

 

Essays posted after the deadline will not be scored but a new Prompt will be posted on Friday, March 2.

[souljaboy]

Business is driven by the goal of earning the greatest profit possible. Both competition and cooperation can be the means towards attaining that goal. In order to be profitable, a business must be able to provide the highest quality product that will entice consumers to purchase it. Competition from others striving to create a better product at a lower price will force a business to improve its own product in order to stay profitable. The lucrative gaming console industry provides an impeccable example of competition between companies striving to offer a better product. Perennially Nintendo has been the leader in gaming console sales but competition sprung up in the past 20 years. In the previous era, the Playstation 2 was the de facto dominant gaming console. However, in this current era, Nintendo has retaken the market due to innovative adaptations necessitated by competition.

 

In other circumstances, cooperation can be even more beneficial and lucrative in the world of business, and often the need for cooperation arises due to necessity. 20 years ago, there were 8 large accounting and auditing firms collective established as the Big Eight. Over the past 20 years, a serious of mergers occurred and now they are known as the Big Four. The cooperation between firms of the Big Eight, such as the merger to form Erst & Young, allows them to become a larger force and dominate the market since they have become significantly larger than the other companies.

 

In the end, competition forces competitors to dedicate more effort towards improvement while cooperation can lead to more profit. In the first example, competition necessitated the need for innovation and to improve the product in order to be better than those offering the same product. Cooperation, however, can be just as lucrative for a business, as exemplified by the cooperation of accounting firms to become a much stronger entity in business. Ultimately, competition and cooperation are two forces in business that are sometimes in a delicate balance.

 

Thanks for the feedback, its my first try at these 30 minute essays

[MathewsMD]

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

Describe a specific situation in which cooperation might be superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition is superior to cooperation in business and when it is inferior.

 

Instructions

In 30 minutes, write an essay for the prompt and instructions above and post your essay in this thread.

 

Use the Notepad accessory on your computer so word processing functions are turned off.

 

Note: Do not read other essays replying to this prompt on the Forum until after you have written and submitted your own essay.

 

Deadline

11:59pm Thursday, March 1.

 

Essays posted after the deadline will not be scored but a new Prompt will be posted on Friday, March 2.

 

Fighting with a partner is uneccesary when trying to accomplish a common goal. If any team is told to finish a certain task, then by cooperating, the group will be able to achieve their goal efficiently. If a law firm like KRMC has a prosecution scheduled in 10 days, then by working as a team, the various lawyers can build up a better case together for their client. Not only is teamwork going to help save time by having different people focus on separate tasks, but the team will be able to create a better case by each individual contributing their own ideas and having a concensus on which path of action is best.

 

Competition makes people work harder to achieve their goal. This is true in nearly every major sporting event. The National Basketball Association is full of talented athletes who have skills most people can only dream of possessing. What is the point of an amazing basketball player like Kobe Bryant to try in a practice or game without a reward. By giving out a prize such as the NBA championship, these players compete and try their hardest in the playoffs because their potential reward is worth it. By having the players compete harder, they put on a better show for their fans, which as a result, creates more revenue since more people are tuning in to watch.

 

Every situation is different, and therefore, must be handled accordingly. Cooperation is the best approach in circumstances where there is a common good that everyone can enjoy. When there is less reward available than people, the same principle applies in which there is less food than consumers, it is survival of the fittest. People will always fight to have more, but when everyone is ultimately going to recieve the same outcome, why not work together?

[DaKirbster]

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

 

The principle purpose of business is to generate profits and build the economy. In competitive business, different companies are fighting for business from the same set of customers, whereas cooperative business involves agreements between companies to minimize competition. Competitive business is more beneficial to companies, as well as customers, than is cooperativity. This is because the competition drives creativity and advancements, pushing each company to strive and succeed over the others. For example, the automobile industry is highly competitive. This results in an inter-corporate race to design and release a car of superior quality than their competitors. Furthermore, the new car must be reasonably priced in order to be competitive as well. The customer ends up with a reasonably priced, superior quality automobile, while the company's profits boom from the sales of this new release.

 

However, there are some cases wherein cooperation over competition is more beneficial to business. For example, the automobile mentioned above will likely need gasoline to function. The gas industry is a business that is universal in North America since so many people drive cars; this creates a high demand for gas. Accordingly, gas companies act cooperatively to set a standard gas price to the consumer based on the price of oil. If this were not the case, gas stations could continuously price their gas slightly lower than their competitors, and price it even lower when their competitors respond in kind. This would result in the price of gas dropping to a significantly lower price margin for the companies, thus significantly dropping profits. In this case, cooperation maximizes the profits of the gas companies, whereas competition would negatively impact business.

 

Whether or not competition or cooperation is better for business depends on whether or not the product being sold is a public necessity. Automobiles, especially new ones, are often considered a luxury, and thus competition drives further research and advancements in their technology. This results in the customer buying an overall better product. Gasoline is a widely needed and consumed product, and currently there is very little gas stations can do to improve the product. Thus, cooperation in the gas industry is most beneficial to the companies for business. Ultimately, the best solution would be a win-win situation where both the consumer and company can be benefit from the exchange, as that is the heart of business.

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by souljaboy

 

Business is driven by the goal of earning the greatest profit possible. Both competition and cooperation can be the means towards attaining that goal. This is better reserved for the resolution paragraph. In order to be profitable, a business must be able to provide the highest quality product that will entice consumers to purchase it. Competition from others striving to create a better product at a lower price will force a business to improve its own product in order to stay profitable. The lucrative gaming console industry provides an impeccable word choice example of competition between companies striving to offer a better product. Perennially Nintendo has been the leader in gaming console sales but competition sprung up in the past 20 years. In the previous era, the Playstation 2 was the de facto dominant gaming console. However, in this current era, Nintendo has retaken the market due to innovative adaptations necessitated by competition.

This example could work but the paragraph is not focused enough on addressing the writing task. You need to focus on why competition is better than cooperation.

 

In other circumstances, cooperation can be even more beneficial and lucrative in the world of business, and often the need for cooperation arises due to necessity. 20 years ago, there were 8 large accounting and auditing firms collectivey established as the Big Eight. Over the past 20 years, a serious grammar of mergers occurred and now they are known as the Big Four. The cooperation between firms of the Big Eight, such as the merger to form Erst & Young, allows them to become a larger force and dominate the market since they have become significantly larger than the other companies. Good. This focuses on some of the benefits of cooperation. Some more elaboration would make it better.

 

In the end, competition forces competitors to dedicate more effort towards improvement while cooperation can lead to more profit. In the first example, competition necessitated the need for innovation and to improve the product in order to be better than those offering the same product. Cooperation, however, can be just as lucrative for a business, as exemplified by the cooperation of accounting firms to become a much stronger entity in business. Ultimately, competition and cooperation are two forces in business that are sometimes in a delicate balance.

This paragraph does not address the resolution task. You don't address the issue of what determines when competition is better or cooperation is better in business.

Overall Mark: 2/6 (Corresponds to approximately a L )

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 2 Supporting task is weakly addressed. Refuting task is adequately addressed. Resolution task is not addressed.

Depth: 3

Focus and coherence: 2 Arguments are not focused on addressing the writing tasks.

Grammar and vocabulary: 3.5

 

 

Thanks for the feedback, its my first try at these 30 minute essays

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by MathewsMD

 

Fighting with a partner is uneccesary when trying to accomplish a common goal. If any team is told to finish a certain task, then by cooperating, the group will be able to achieve their goal efficiently. If a law firm like KRMC has a prosecution scheduled in 10 days, then by working as a team, the various lawyers can build up a better case together for their client. Not only is teamwork going to help save time by having different people focus on separate tasks, but the team will be able to create a better case by each individual contributing their own ideas and having a concensus on which path of action is best.

The main problem here is that this example isn't focused enough on business. This is too general and only very peripherally related to business.

 

You should stick with the standard paragraph order of: supporting paragraph, refuting paragraph and resolution paragraph. This is what the marker will be expecting.

 

Competition makes people work harder to achieve their goal. This is true in nearly every major sporting event. The National Basketball Association is full of talented athletes who have skills most people can only dream of possessing. What is the point of an amazing basketball player like Kobe Bryant to try in a practice or game without a reward. By giving out a prize such as the NBA championship, these players compete and try their hardest in the playoffs because their potential reward is worth it. By having the players compete harder, they put on a better show for their fans, which as a result, creates more revenue since more people are tuning in to watch.

Similar problem to your last paragraph, this is not focused enough on business. It is again only peripherally related to business.

 

Every situation is different, and therefore, must be handled accordingly. Cooperation is the best approach in circumstances where there is a common good that everyone can enjoy. This is ambiguous and vague. When there is less reward available than people ??, the same principle applies in which there is less food than consumers, it is survival of the fittest. People will always fight to have more, but when everyone is ultimately going to recieve the same outcome, why not work together?

Again, this is not related to business. It is also vague and lacks depth. The ideas are simplistic and not really related to addressing the writing task.

 

I would recommend starting with the basics of the writing sample.

 

Overall Mark: 1.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a K )

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 1.5 Supporting task is weakly addressed. Refuting task is weakly addressed. Resolution task is not addressed.

Depth: 1.5 Ideas lack depth.

Focus and coherence: 1.5 Arguments are not focused on the topic of the prompt.

Grammar and vocabulary: 3.5

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by DaKirbster

 

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

 

The principle purpose of business is to generate profits and build the economy. In competitive business, different companies are fighting for business from the same set of customers, whereas cooperative business involves agreements between companies to minimize competition. Competitive business is more beneficial to companies, as well as customers, than is cooperativity. This is because the competition drives creativity and advancements, pushing each company to strive and succeed over the others. For example, the automobile industry is highly competitive. This results in an inter-corporate race to design and release a car of superior quality than their competitors. Furthermore, the new car must be reasonably priced in order to be competitive as well. The customer ends up with a reasonably priced, superior quality automobile, while the company's profits boom from the sales of this new release.

This example is good. A good argument is made that this is beneficial to the consumer. However, it is not clear how competition is better than cooperation for the businesses as you have stated. You could have also mentioned any car companies here to move your example from hypothetical to a real world example.

 

However, there are some cases wherein cooperation over competition is more beneficial to business. For example, the automobile mentioned above will likely need gasoline to function. The gas industry is a business that is universal in North America since so many people drive cars; this creates a high demand for gas. Accordingly, gas companies act cooperatively to set a standard gas price for the consumer based on the price of oil. If this were not the case, gas stations could continuously price their gas slightly lower than their competitors, and price it even lower when their competitors respond in kind. This would result in the price of gas dropping to a significantly lower price margin for the companies, thus significantly dropping word choice profits. In this case, cooperation maximizes the profits of the gas companies, whereas competition would negatively impact business.

The example of gas companies is good. However, the way it is explained here is very average. It is not compelling or strong.

 

Whether or not competition or cooperation is better for business depends on whether or not the product being sold is a public necessity. Automobiles, especially new ones, are often considered a luxury, and thus competition drives further research and advancements in their technology. This results in the customer buying an overall better product. Gasoline is a widely needed and consumed product, and currently there is very little gas stations can do to improve the product how is this relevant? It is not part of your resolution principle. Thus, cooperation in the gas industry is most beneficial to the companies for business. Ultimately, the best solution would be a win-win situation where both the consumer and company can be benefit from the exchange, as that is the heart of business.

Overall, the argument is flimsy. There is no clear separation of the examples. How can an automobile be a luxury and the gasoline that is required to run it be considered a necessity? If gasoline is a necessity than so is the automobile it is used in.

 

Overall Mark: 2.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a M)

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 2.5 Supporting task is somewhat addressed. Refuting task is adequately addressed. Resolution task is weakly addressed.

Depth: 3

Focus and coherence: 3.5

Grammar and vocabulary: 4

[Call_Me_Doc]

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

Describe a specific situation in which cooperation might be superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition is superior to cooperation in business and when it is inferior.

 

Instructions

In 30 minutes, write an essay for the prompt and instructions above and post your essay in this thread.

 

Use the Notepad accessory on your computer so word processing functions are turned off.

 

Note: Do not read other essays replying to this prompt on the Forum until after you have written and submitted your own essay.

 

Deadline

11:59pm Thursday, March 1.

 

Essays posted after the deadline will not be scored but a new Prompt will be posted on Friday, March 2.

 

By working cooperatively in a business environment, there are a number of benefits to be gained. A hardworking team can get a task done more efficiently because every member will be able to contribute their own ideas, and these can be improved upon by other fellow co-workers. Also, by having different people focus on separate tasks, the workload can be distributed equally among each individual allowing for more work to be completed. If a large company like Bombardier has a deadline to manufacture a plane within a month, then working cooperatively is the best strategy. Through this method, the different workers will be able to create, inspect, and test the plane before lift-off. If the daunting task of making a plane within a month was given to a single individual, he would definitely struggle, and most definitely, not finish on time. In this scenario, teamwork is essential to ensure that Bombardier meets its deadline because creating a plane in a month requires many people to work as hard and efficiently as possible. One person would not suffice.

 

By having people compete with each other, you make them work harder to achieve their goal, and if you own a business, this is how you want your employees to work everyday. Stores at which employees are paid mainly on commission such as car dealerships have workers competing with co-workers to get the most clients and sell the most cars. This strategy of paying by commission makes employees work harder for their money, and by them selling more cars, the company also makes money. From the car dealership's perspective, it is a win-win situation because they benefit by either paying their employees very low wages if they do not sell any cars, or they gain money when their employees sell their cars. Competition is a good method for businesses when they are trying to sell merchandise because then their employees work harder, and the business gets more money.

 

Different aspects of business must be handled accordingly because every situation is not exactly the same. If there is a task that is extremely time-consuming and difficult, working cooperatively is a great method because the large amount of work will not be finished by one person. By having employees compete to sell more products, the business will benefit because their workers are selling more products which will increase the business' profit. What truly determines when cooperation is superior to competition is through which method the business will maximize their earnings.

[medoc]

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

 

Describe a specific situation in which cooperation might be superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition is superior to cooperation in business and when it is inferior.

 

With the world's fast growing technology, every business is looking for ways to improve their products to increase profits. When there are many companies manufacturing similar products, competition grows between them to be able to attract consumers to buy their own products other than the competitors' products. For instance, when considering Apple's Iphones and Google's Android phones, they are both smart phones that differ in certain aspects to fulfill consumers' needs. Both of these companies are constantly improving their operating systems to compete with one another. When Apple introduces a new feature or a new model of their Iphones, Google will also release a product to compete with the Iphone. This way, Google reviews the new features Apple has introduced and then tries to enhance its Android system to attract consumers to buy their phones. If Google does not compete in improving their operating systems to over power Apple's innovations, it may lose its customers buying their Android phones. So, it is important to always improve products based on competitor's products to maximize profits.

 

On the other hand, cooperation is also important when running a business. Businesses will always seek other companies' help to generate higher income. For example, without the help of media and advertising companies, it is tough to introduce a certain product to a large group of consumers. When Apple or Google develops a new phone, they cooperate with advertising companies and media to introduce their new phones and the features to the public. This way, the advertising company earns profit by cooperating with Apple or Google, and the phone companies benefit from spreading the news to a large audience that are potential customers. Since advertising companies and phone companies have different motives to gain profits, such as advertising companies rely on companies to advertise using them, and phone companies rely on selling their phones for profit, they are able to cooperate with one another to help each other. As long as the products offered by companies are different, they can cooperate well with one another to achieve their business goals.

 

It is clear that when similar products are offered by companies, these businesses seem to compete with one another to maximize their profits. This is shown in the example using Iphones and Android phones; the reason why they compete is due to both offering smart phones with slight differences. If a business wants to maximize its profits, it also needs to work well with other companies to advertise what it has to offer to the consumers. As shown in the example above, businesses will cooperate well with media or advertising companies to get consumers' attention to their products. In business, competition is equally important as cooperation with other companies to withstand consumers' expectations and to maximize profits.

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay by Call_Me_Doc

 

I recommend you follow the standard paragraph order of supporting paragraph, refuting paragraph and then resolution paragraph. This is how the prompt is arranged and is what the marker will be expecting.

 

By working cooperatively in a business environment, there are a number of benefits to be gained. A hardworking team can get a task done more efficiently because every member will be able to contribute their own ideas, and these can be improved upon by other fellow co-workers. Also, by having different people focus on separate tasks, the workload can be distributed equally among each individual allowing for more work to be completed. If a large company like Bombardier has a deadline to manufacture a plane within a month, then working cooperatively is the best strategy. Through this method, the different workers will be able to create, inspect, and test the plane before lift-off. If the daunting task of making a plane within a month was given to a single individual, he would definitely struggle, and most definitely, not finish on time. In this scenario, teamwork is essential to ensure that Bombardier meets its deadline because creating a plane in a month requires many people to work as hard and efficiently as possible. One person would not suffice.

This example doesn't fit well with what the prompt is looking for. It is only very loosely related to business. This is more about team work in general (you could have substituted any situation which requires more than one person to complete a task). The idea lacks strength because it would be unrealistic for Bombardier to utilize a competitive system within their own business to build planes.

 

By having people compete with each other, you make them work harder to achieve their goal, and if you own a business, this is how you want your employees to work everyday. Stores at which employees are paid mainly on commission such as car dealerships have workers competing with co-workers to get the most clients and sell the most cars. This strategy of paying by commission makes employees work harder for their money, and by them selling more cars, the company also makes money. From the car dealership's perspective, it is a win-win situation because they benefit by either paying their employees very low wages if they do not sell any cars, or they gain money when their employees sell their cars. Competition is a good method for businesses when they are trying to sell merchandise because then their employees work harder, and the business gets more money.

This example is a bit better because the alternative of cooperation is realistic. In order to better address the writing task, the discussion should not only discuss competition but also why in this case competition is superior to cooperation.

Different aspects of business must be handled accordingly because every situation is not exactly the same. This is obvious and is not a good transition. If there is a task that is extremely time-consuming and difficult, working cooperatively is a great method because the large amount of work will not be finished by one person. By having employees compete to sell more products, the business will benefit because their workers are selling more products which will increase the business' profit. What truly determines when cooperation is superior to competition is through which method the business will maximize their earnings.

There are a few issues here:

1) You don't have a clear resolution principle that is applied to both examples. You need to lay out clear conditions of when competition is better and when cooperation is better. Your resolution principle of if a task is extremely time consuming and difficult is not applied to your second example.

2) You need to discuss your examples with respect to your resolution principle.

3) Follow the standard template/format for the resolution paragraph to better organize your thoughts.

 

Overall Mark: 2.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a M)

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 2.5 Supporting task is weakly addressed. Refuting task is adequately addressed. Resolution task is weakly addressed.

Depth: 3 Ideas lack depth and complexity.

Focus and coherence: 3 Arguments need to be more focused on addressing the writing tasks.

Grammar and vocabulary: 4.5

[RaymondPrep101]

Essay submitted by medoc

 

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

 

Describe a specific situation in which cooperation might be superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition is superior to cooperation in business and when it is inferior.

 

With the world's fast growing technology, every business is looking for ways to improve their products to increase profits. When there are many companies manufacturing similar products, competition grows between them to be able to attract consumers to buy their own products rather than the competitors' products. Solid introduction. For instance, when considering Apple's Iphones and Google's Android phones, they are both smart phones that differ in certain aspects to fulfill consumers' needs. Both of these companies are constantly improving their operating systems to compete with one another. When Apple introduces a new feature or a new model of their Iphones, Google will also release a product to compete with the Iphone. This way, Google reviews the new features Apple has introduced and then tries to enhance its Android system to attract consumers to buy their phones. If Google does not compete in improving their operating systems to over power word choice Apple's innovations, it may lose its customers buying their Android phones. So, it is important to always improve products based on competitor's products to maximize profits.

This example could work but is not focused on addressing the writing task.You establish that there is competition and that competition is important. But you do not address how or why competition is superior to cooperation in this situation which is the focus of the prompt.

 

On the other hand, cooperation is also important when running a business. Businesses will always seek other companies' help to generate higher income. For example, without the help of media and advertising companies, it is tough to introduce a certain product to a large group of consumers. When Apple or Google develops a new phone, they cooperate with advertising companies and media to introduce their new phones and the features to the public. This way, the advertising company earns profit by cooperating with Apple or Google, and the phone companies benefit from spreading the news to a large audience that are potential customers. Since advertising companies and phone companies have different motives to gain profits, such as advertising companies rely on companies to advertise using them, and phone companies rely on selling their phones for profit, they are able to cooperate with one another to help each other. As long as the products offered by companies are different, they can cooperate well with one another to achieve their business goals.

Similar issue to before, the example is well explained and you establish that cooperation takes place and is important. However, you do not address how or why cooperation is better than competition in this case.

 

It is clear that when similar products are offered by companies, these businesses seem to compete with one another to maximize their profits. This is shown in the example using Iphones and Android phones; the reason why they compete is due to both offering smart phones with slight differences. If a business wants to maximize its profits, it also needs to work well with other companies to advertise what it has to offer to the consumers. As shown in the example above, businesses will cooperate well with media or advertising companies to get consumers' attention to their products. In business, competition is equally important as cooperation with other companies to withstand consumers' expectations and to maximize profits.

Problems:

You should introduce your resolution principle laying out the conditions that determine when competition is better and when cooperation is better.

Your concluding sentence is indicative of how the point of the resolution task is missed. The goal is not to establish that both competition and cooperation are important. The purpose is to establish when one is better than the other and vice versa.

 

Everything is well written here. However, the main problem here is that the discussion is not focused on addressing the writing tasks. Essentially, the "point" of the prompt is missed.

 

Overall Mark: 1.5/6 (Corresponds to approximately a K)

Breakdown (out of 6):

Addresses tasks: 1.5 All of the tasks are only weakly addressed.

Depth: 3.5

Focus and coherence: 1.5 Essay isn't focused on addressing the thrust of the prompt.

Grammar and vocabulary: 4