Monday, April 6, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Peer Edit (second try)
Brandon Ku - Darfur: The Dilemma and Solution
Main Idea: History lesson on genocide, the situation in Darfur, and two possible solutions. He talks a lot about genocide in the past, how it came about, and how it progressed. It is very informative, but sounds like a report, not an argument. He does state his argument in his thesis which states, "Through analysis of Sudan's History, and it's situation in the globalized world of today, Darfur's conflict can be resolved through Global intervention and aide in the country's system of education."
His argument could be more clear by using fewer facts about genocides in the past and the situation in Darfur, and talking more about his argument and tying in the facts to it.
His argument is moderately disagreeable, though it is not clear what "global intervention" really means. He could maybe narrow his argument to make it more debatable.
As for the scope, I think his argument is too big to fit into this paper. As stated in our meeting, he should pick one of the two arguments and stick to that.
I like the introduction, it hooks the reader to the paper and introduces the topic. he could probably introduce his argument a little more, and not just the situation in Darfur.
I think he has great evidence to back up his argument, as long as it is explained and fine-tuned to back up mainly just his argument.
Great paper!
Main Idea: History lesson on genocide, the situation in Darfur, and two possible solutions. He talks a lot about genocide in the past, how it came about, and how it progressed. It is very informative, but sounds like a report, not an argument. He does state his argument in his thesis which states, "Through analysis of Sudan's History, and it's situation in the globalized world of today, Darfur's conflict can be resolved through Global intervention and aide in the country's system of education."
His argument could be more clear by using fewer facts about genocides in the past and the situation in Darfur, and talking more about his argument and tying in the facts to it.
His argument is moderately disagreeable, though it is not clear what "global intervention" really means. He could maybe narrow his argument to make it more debatable.
As for the scope, I think his argument is too big to fit into this paper. As stated in our meeting, he should pick one of the two arguments and stick to that.
I like the introduction, it hooks the reader to the paper and introduces the topic. he could probably introduce his argument a little more, and not just the situation in Darfur.
I think he has great evidence to back up his argument, as long as it is explained and fine-tuned to back up mainly just his argument.
Great paper!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)