Peer Review of WA2 of Javin Tham Kai Sheng by SHIVAM PATHAK

Outline of the essay is well planned and gives the mirror image of the essay to be written. The headings of the outline can be improved by staing as argument number 1 and its rebuttal and so on.

Regarding technicality , In-text citations must have space after and before open and close bracket respectively. Other than this evrything else seems to be fine with no spelling mistakes.Grammatically the sentences are correct and whole essay is within the word limits.

The essay uses exhaustive references and comes up with lots of information researched.This is very appreciable and rebuttal statements need enough supporting reasons and arguments. Each paragraph gives a clear idea of what are the opposing and supporting reasons for the side he has chosen to argue with.However, the concluding lines in each paragraphs are absent which must be present in order to state what does your argument leads to. References used are very conclusive of the facts used.There was no point where I could find myself lost with arguments.Information is specific and well organised.His stand is clear and well neuralized.Overall the essay gives a very good impression of argumentative style of the writer.

Peer review of Shivam Pathak’s WA1 (Revision) by Tham Kai Sheng

I suppose one of main differences I can see at one glance is the length of the thesis statement, which is quite similar to mine as well. I understand that after the conference, we realize that even the topic sentence of the main ideas should be specifically pointed out due to academicism, as told by Dr. Sadorra, affecting the thesis statement to be in line with that.

I can see that there’s a change of topic sentence in one paragraph, which I suppose is processed to become a specific one. Apart from this good job, I think there are not much changes around, perhaps Shivam’s first draft was already satisfactory.

Again, about technical issue, there are a few tiny mistakes that I would like to point out. Page numbers should be included like what I have commented previously, so does the page break between outline and essay. I do not really know the generality of the rule but, basically, I think there should be one space after every punctuation mark, except parenthesis, and before an open parenthesis, there should be one space as well. Moreover, if I am not mistaken, there should be a line as space to separate two consecutive paragraphs. Hope that Shivam will take note of this next time. Furthermore, there are still over 800 words there, but I can see the effort of minimizing the body since the thesis statement grows. Nevertheless, at the good side, Shivam has changed the font of references according to the style sheet and the in-text citations according to APA style. I would like to thank Shivam for taking note of what I have previously commented.

Overall, I think the essay is informative with high degree of precision, both in the structure and data.

Peer Review on Final WA1 of Tham Kai Sheng by SHIVAM PATHAK

The revised essay is more or less same as the previous one with addition of some points in every paragraph whether being points( example- in paragraph 4 the point related to the EU has been added while CHINA and INDIA is generalized as developing nations) or the sentence structure.This makes the essay impressive and more exhaustive.

The style of writing is very straightforward towards the topic.This is acknowledgeable. The essay is not very lengthy and refreshing.After reading through 1st paragraph I could very well make out the points it need to discuss in following paragraphs. They are well elaborated as well.

The point which I gave could be included ,however, as JAVIN commented previously, since essay was long enough there was no need to include that.This is OK. There are no more grammatical errors as far as I could see.

Overall the essay is nice and self-explanatory to understand the pledges needed to be made in upcoming conference in Mexico city.

Peer Review on WA1 of Tham Kai Sheng by SHIVAM PATHAK

After reading through the essay I could identify and get a clear picture of what is needed to be done in next meeting by developed and developing countries after Copenhagen Accord. At the end of second paragraph the concluding point is repeated a bit.Other than this there seem to be no problem in repetition of ideas.Each point is well explained and elaborated with use of exhaustive examples.

The style of writing is very straightforward without "beating in the bush" which is acknowledgeable. The essay is a bit wordy(more than 800 words) and use of vocabulary is kept simple and refreshing. The thesis statement in first paragraph is very well elaborated and point of explanation is well positioned in paragraphs.

Besides the three points pointed by Sheng, I think there also includes a long-term social step taken by governments to convince the common mob of their respective countries to terms of Copenhagen Accord. Developing countries have lot of issues like poverty,education to deal with hence government should take step to aware people to use clean fuels, bio-fuels. People in developed countries are used to modern lifestyle.Governments have to show them way to compromise their lifestyle for our environment.Hence , lots of negotiations have to be dealt.

Overall the essay is exhaustive in itself to understand the pledges needed to be made.