ASSIGNMENT IN EAPP

MAIRY RHOSE A. SANTOS DECEMBER 10,2019

STEM 12- TESLA MRS. GINA BALAJORO

THESIS STATEMENT
 A thesis statement clearly identifies the topic being discussed, it should only cover what is being discussed
in the paper, and is written for a specific audience. Your thesis statement belongs at the end of your first
paragraph, also known as your introduction. Use it to generate interest in your topic and encourage your
audience to continue reading.
 A thesis statement is a sentence that states what you want your paper to show, what you want to convince
your readers of after having read your thesis. This is the foundation of the entire work and informs the
reader exactly what you wish to achieve with the paper, and what you wish to prove.

The Four Keys to Writing a Good Thesis Statement

1. Assertive: Your thesis statement must state exactly what you intend to prove with the paper. While your
conclusions can be cautious, your thesis statement should preferably be strong.
2. Singular: The thesis statement, in most cases, should contain only one clear idea, keeping the paper focused.
3. Specific: The thesis statement should be as specific as possible, whilst making your stance clear. One sentence
is enough for shorter papers.
4. Well-positioned: It should be included in the introduction, in most cases at the very end.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRECIS AND ABSTRACT

A PRECIS; A precis is a precise condensation of the basic thesis and major points of a paper; it tells the reader
the gist of what has been said. In other words, a precis answers the question: "what's this paper saying?" They are
similar to "annotation" for an annotated bibliography, but a precis is a bit more extensive. “Précis” is just an
academic term for “summary,”

MEANWHILE

AN ABSTRACT; An abstract can be defined as a ‘summary’ of a document. An abstract often precedes an article
in an academic or scholarly publication, whether it deals with fine arts or natural or social sciences. An abstract
usually uses the vocabulary of the document itself and may even include quotations from it. A ‘précis’ is also
generally the summing up of an academic or official document, so very similar to an abstract, but it is put in one’s
own words, that is, it is paraphrased.
COMPARISON BETWEEN REVIEW AND CRITIQUE

A CRITIQUE; A critique can simply be understood as a critical assessment. Unlike most reviews, critiques are
written by experts in a particular field. Hence, critiques tend to be technical and objective. They do not provide
an overall assessment but focuses on specific parts of a piece of work. It emphasizes both the positives as well as
the negatives.

WHILE

A REVIEW; A review refers to a formal evaluation of a particular work. In magazines and newspapers, you may
have seen various reviews such as book reviews, film reviews, restaurant reviews, music, etc. These are written
by lay persons in the form of an assessment of something.

A critique is written by the professionals who have holistic knowledge about the field, this includes the technical
and objective assessment of the field that was criticized. While the review is a formal evaluation that tends to
summarized everything as a whole, not by parts and can be written by a person who witness the piece.

STRUCTURE OF REVIEW

Elements of a review paper

This guide explains each section of a review paper and gives specific information about what should be included
in each.

Title Page
On the title page include the title, your name, and the date. Your instructor may have additional requirements
(such as the course number, etc.) so be sure to follow the guidelines on the assignment sheet. Professional journals
may also have more specific requirements for the title page.

Abstract
An abstract is a brief summary of your review. The abstract should include only the main points of your review.
Think of the abstract as a chance for the reader to preview your paper and decide if they want to read on for the
details.

Introduction
The introduction of your review should accomplish three things:

 Introduce your topic

o It may sound redundant to "introduce" your topic in the introduction, but often times writer's fail
to do so. Let the reader in on background information specific to the topic, define terms that may
be unfamiliar to them, explain the scope of the discussion, and your purpose for writing the review.
  State your topic's relevance
o Think of your review paper as a statement in the larger conversation of your academic community.
Your review is your way of entering into that conversation and it is important to briefly address
why your review is relevant to the discussion. You may feel the relevance is obvious because you
are so familiar with the topic, but your readers have not yet established that familiarity.

 Reveal your thesis to the reader

o The thesis is the main idea that you want to get across to your reader. your thesis should be a clear
statement of what you intend to prove or illustrate by your review. By revealing your thesis in the
introduction the reader knows what to expect in the rest of the paper.

Discussion
The discussion section is the body of your paper. The discussion section contains information that develops and
supports your thesis. While there is no particular form that a discussion section must take there are several
considerations that a writer must follow when building a discussion.

 Don't summarize!
o A review paper is not simply a summary of literature you have reviewed. Be careful not to leave
out your own analysis of the ideas presented in the literature. Synthesize the material from all the
works—what are the connections you see, or the connections you are trying to illustrate, among
your readings.

 Analyze, Synthesize, Interpret.

o A review paper is not a pure summary of the information you read for your review. You are
required to analyze, synthesize, and interpret the information you read in some meaningful way. It
is not enough to simply present the material you have found, you must go beyond that and explain
its relevance and significance to the topic at hand. Establish a clear thesis from the onset of your
writing and examine which pieces of your reading help you in developing and supporting the ideas
in your thesis.

 Stay focused.
o Keep your discussion focused on your topic and more importantly your thesis. Don't let tangents
or extraneous material get in the way of a concise, coherent discussion. A well focused paper is
crucial in getting your message across to your reader.

 Organize your points.

o Keeping your points organized makes it easier for the reader to follow along and make sense of
your review. Start each paragraph with a topic sentence that relates back to your thesis. The
headings used for this guide give you some idea of how to organize the overall paper, but as far as
the discussion section goes use meaningful subheadings that relate to your content to organize your
points.
  Relate the discussion to your thesis.
o Your thesis should illustrate your objectives in writing the review and your discussion should serve
to accomplish your objectives. Make sure your keep your discussion related to the thesis in order
to meet your objectives. If you find that your discussion does not relate so much to your thesis,
don't panic, you might want to revise your thesis instead of reworking the discussion.

Conclusions
Because the conclusions section often gets left for last it is often the weakest part of a student review paper. It is
as crucial a part of the paper as any and should be treated as such.

A good conclusion should illustrate the key connections between your major points and your thesis as well as
they key connections between your thesis and the broader discussion—what is the significance of your paper in
a larger context? Make some conclusions—where have you arrived as a result of writing this paper?

Be careful not to present any new information in the conclusion section.

References
Here you report all the works you have cited in your paper. The format for a references page varies by discipline
as does how you should cite your references within the paper.

How to write a critique

Before you start writing, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the work that will be critiqued.

 Study the work under discussion.

 Make notes on key parts of the work.

 Develop an understanding of the main argument or purpose being expressed in the work.

 Consider how the work relates to a broader issue or context.

There are a variety of ways to structure a critique. You should always check your unit materials or blackboard
site for guidance from your lecturer. The following template, which showcases the main features of a critique, is
provided as one example.

Introduction
Typically, the introduction is short (less than 10% of the word length) and you should:

 Name the work being reviewed as well as the date it was created and the name of the author/creator.

 Describe the main argument or purpose of the work.

  Explain the context in which the work was created. This could include the social or political context, the
place of the work in a creative or academic tradition, or the relationship between the work and the creator’s
life experience.

 Have a concluding sentence that signposts what your evaluation of the work will be. For instance, it may
indicate whether it is a positive, negative, or mixed evaluation.

Summary
Briefly summarize the main points and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by using techniques,
styles, media, characters or symbols. This summary should not be the focus of the critique and is usually shorter
than the critical evaluation.

Critical evaluation
This section should give a systematic and detailed assessment of the different elements of the work, evaluating
how well the creator was able to achieve the purpose through these. For example: you would assess the plot
structure, characterization and setting of a novel; an assessment of a painting would look at composition, brush
strokes, colour and light; a critique of a research project would look at subject selection, design of the experiment,
analysis of data and conclusions.

A critical evaluation does not simply highlight negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and identify
both strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its success, in light of its purpose.

Examples of key critical questions that could help your assessment include:

 Who is the creator? Is the work presented objectively or subjectively?

 What are the aims of the work? Were the aims achieved?

 What techniques, styles, media were used in the work? Are they effective in portraying the purpose?

 What assumptions underlie the work? Do they affect its validity?

 What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has evidence been interpreted fairly?

 How is the work structured? Does it favour a particular interpretation or point of view? Is it effective?

 Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas or theories? Does the work engage (or fail to engage)
with key concepts or other works in its discipline?

This evaluation is written in formal academic style and logically presented. Group and order your ideas into
paragraphs. Start with the broad impressions first and then move into the details of the technical elements. For
shorter critiques, you may discuss the strengths of the works, and then the weaknesses. In longer critiques, you
may wish to discuss the positive and negative of each key critical question in individual paragraphs.

To support the evaluation, provide evidence from the work itself, such as a quote or example, and you should also
cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your evaluation of the work.

Conclusion
This is usually a very brief paragraph, which includes:

 A statement indicating the overall evaluation of the work

 A summary of the key reasons, identified during the critical evaluation, why this evaluation was formed.

 In some circumstances, recommendations for improvement on the work may be appropriate.

Reference list
Include all resources cited in your critique. Check with your lecturer/tutor for which referencing style to use.

WRITING CONCEPT PAPER

Concept papers are summaries of projects or issues that reflect the interests, experience and expertise of the
writer or organization. Concept papers generally serve the purpose of providing in-depth discussion of a topic
that the writer has a strong position on, usually with the intent of obtaining funding for that project from donors.
The terms "concept paper" and "proposal" are often used interchangeably as they can be used for the same
function. The concept paper may also be used as an instructional tool that may have developed as a result of
extensive research, committee input and/or as a result of the outcome of a current project. In addition to providing
guidance for implementation of a program, a concept paper could also discuss best practices, philosophies and
other related issues that the writer believes action should be taken on in the near future.

Typically, a concept paper contains these elements:

1. A title in the form of a question. This may be the last part ofthe concept paper that you write, but it should
appear at the heading of the paper.

2. A clear description of the research topic, including a summary of what is already known about that topic.

3. A one-sentence statement of the research question that the project will seek to answer. (This is almost always
something that is not known.) The concept paper should elaborate on how this question can be answered --
something that almost always takes more than one sentence to accomplish.

4. A demonstration of why it is important to answer this research question. What good comes of this answer?
Why is this project worth writing?

5. A description of how the researcher plans to answer the research question. This includes:

a. a description of the data or evidence that the researcher plans to gather or use;
b. a description of how the researcher will analyze these data; and
c. a demonstration of how these data and this analytic method will answer the research question.