Turning Paralympians into Super-humans Article Analysis

Turning Paralympians into Super-humans Article Analysis Critical Analysis of Pepper, P. Turning Paralympians into super-humans is no help to disabled people, The Guardian, 6 September, 2016 In Penny Peppers article Turning Paralympians into superhuman is no help to disabled people, which was originally published on the guardian website on the 6th of September, Penny Pepper contends that while characterising Paralympians as superhuman detracts away from the real issues that disable people have to deal with. Penny pepper highlights how disabled people are not being helped by the government and that the system in place doesnt do enough with regards to care and support for those who are disabled. The article Turning Paralympians into super-humans is no help to the disabled as Penny Pepper has been a writer and disability rights activist for over 20 years now and has an in depth knowledge of this subject. Peppers knowledge leads to an informative and insightful article creating much for the reader to consider in their day to day lives where many may not spend adequate time looking at how difficult the daily lives of those who are disabled can be and how much of this is possi bly down to a lack of infrastructure or down to unfulfilled promises from the government (Bagenstos, 2009). I think that this article does highlight issues that maybe do not get enough consideration and deserve a lot more examination in todays society. The main points of this article are, firstly, the campaign with which the author, Penny Pepper, has been tirelessly been fighting for. This is the fight for the independent living of Disabled people, which has gone again unnoticed after multiple campaigns for the independent living movement. The article then goes onto mention the cuts in funding that has led to terrible suffering for the disabled and also that there have been regular and consistent broken promises by the government which have led to these. Penny Pepper mentions the terrible living conditions that these situations have led to she says left living in their own mess and sleeping in vomit. (Pepper, 2016) The article then goes on to talk about how the majority of people on the committee simply cannot understand the reality of disabled lives and the inequality that there is. Pepper talks about three left-wing politicians and their support for her campaign. Pepper then goes onto discuss her concerns over whether labelling P aralympians as superhuman creates an image in which the only disabled person thats acceptable is a Paralympian. Which creates incredibly deep wounds for those who are disabled without being Paralympians. But, Pepper in the article, goes onto talk about how temporary this focus on the issue is and how it shouldnt just be highlighted for four weeks while the Paralympics goes on. Another one of Peppers points in the article is that of what is the social construct of disability and what, where and who came up with this social model of disability and whether it is outdated and need to be updated to be considered properly in a modern day sense. Pepper concludes with a look at the lack of government support and interest in helping the disabled within society and refusing to input finances into infrastructure that would help those who are disabled and how sadly within society there are still barriers with which those who are disable have to encounter and overcome. For example trying to get a job despite attempts by those in power (Wilsonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ Kovacs et al., 2008). Pepper concludes with her hopes for the future and where she hopes progress may take the disabled in society. Pepper concludes with the quote let us be ordinary, let us be every day and let us at least have rights. Rights to independent living. (Pepper, 2016). This returns the article to what Pepper started with which was the right to independent living. It is apparent throughout the article that there is an agenda behind what Penny Pepper is writing and that becomes visible while reading her article. Pepper uses her activism in everyday life to help support her article and by doing this she creates an article that is meant to be firstly informative about the struggles of disabled people within society(Quarmby, 2012). Peppers first hand experiences of what a disabled person has to encounter every day. Pepper manages to highlight how on a day to day basis there is a need for those in society who have this label of being disabled to be considered and a need for activism (Rhodes et al., 2008). This activism is anything from peaceful marches to articles to disabled or hacking a website which Graeme Ellis. Ellis sabotaged the conservative party website after he claimed that George Osbornes budget had gone some way to completely ignoring the plight of those in society who are disabled. This led to Graeme Ellis taking down the website for T he Conservative Disability Group. In my opinion I find this article to be an attempt to persuade the reader of the plight of the disabled and an attempt to get the reader to join the attempt to follow her attempts to create a better life for the disabled. However, I feel like it could be a stronger argument and if there was a bit more decision over whether her article was supposed to be informative or persuasive. The problem with this article is that, what was supposed to shed a positive light on the Paralympics. It was supposed to be a celebration of the abilities of those who are disabled. When Channel 4 released the Were the Superhumans advert with the backing song yes I can by Sammy Davis Jr. performed by a big band composed of musicians with disabilities. All these attempts were in an attempt to celebrate what people with disabilities can do. It was not supposed to be an illustration or an attempt to shame those who have disabilities that havent become Paralympians. This article tries to suggest that this advert was an assault on daily lives of those who are disabled. I fail to see how this is advert is anything else than an attempt to celebrate the achievements of those that are disabled. When Penny Pepper wrote in the Guardian editorial that The hyping of disabled athletes into superhuman status by Channel 4 only deepens our wounds, inflicted by continual assaults on our daily lives. S he portrays this as all negative, but through this advert the public in the UK became increasingly more excited and involved in the Paralympics. I believe that this is therefore not a bad thing as it creates a society where disability is in the forefront of societies mind. However, one of the strengths of this article written by Penny Pepper, is how she considers the idea of what the social construct of disability is. Pepper says Many disabled people know that disability is a social construct. This is a kindergarten-level social model of disability It is easy to forget the role that society plays in helping those who are disabled deal with everyday life. This is summed up well by the quote It is everyday socio-spatial environments which di-able people (Sawadsri, 2012). This includes the lack of ramps into public buildings and the presence of steps throughout towns and cities across the United Kingdom. These are factors that Pepper argues creates disability, but it goes so much further which I think Pepper tries to state. It is forgotten that so much of disability comes down to the attitudes of society.   Penny Pepper has been an activist for this and has regularly talked about these social barriers that disabled people have to deal with. These c an be split into three sections environment, attitudes and organisations. Under environment pepper talks about inaccessibility to buildings and services and this ties into what Pepper says with regards to the lack of governmental investment with regards to infrastructure. As Pepper says in the article while the unending fact of inaccessible environments and savage attacks on our services continues to invalidate such proposals. (Pepper, 2016) This goes onto how the attitudes within society makes it difficult for those who are disabled. Another example of these social barriers that Pepper mentions in her example. This therefore shows one of the strengths of Peppers article in highlighting what is regularly overlooked when attempting to help those who are disabled in society. The article highlights the role of society and how there is a way of helping those in disabled situations and creating a situation where disabled people are not represented as other but as just someone fully integ rated into society. (Garland-Thomson, 2002) Another feature of this article is its political aspect, which becomes apparent in the first quarter of the article. All the politicians that are mentioned are inherently left wing, including Jeremy Corbyn who is one of the stauncher left wing politicians in the United Kingdom today. This displays an attitude from Pepper that falls in line with popular opinion today suggesting that the right wing parties in the United Kingdom, the Conservatives, do not care about those who are disabled. It also suggests that she feels that she may be able to show that in her writing the left-wing politicians are the only people in government who are willing to help those in society who are disabled. It certainly displays an aspect to her writing where Pepper is trying to convince the reader that if they care about this issue then they must, almost, vote and identify with the left wing in the United Kingdom. Another columnist from The Guardian, Amelia Gentleman wrote it is simply no longer possible to be disabled and a Tory this was a quote from Graeme Ellis a life-long conservative voter and disability activist. This does however highlight the cuts that the conservative party has made since being in power to disability benefits. This therefore suggests that this article has a political agenda and thereby suggests that this article is aimed at a specific audience. This could also be explained by the publication being The Guardian newspaper which is renowned for being a more left wing newspaper in the United Kingdom. Finally, it is important to consider whether Penny Pepper has accomplished what she set out to do with writing her article. I think that Pepper does essentially achieve what she set out to do, which was to highlight her disagreement with Paralympians being labelled as superhuman but also to disagree with how the disabled are treated and supported in todays society (Wolbring, 2016). I think that Pepper could have created a more effective essay if she had considered fewer problems within society rather than have such a broad range of topics including social construct of disability and how politics is not helping those who are disabled in society. Therefore it could be said that to some extent Penny Pepper has achieved what she set out to do when writing this article with a well-researched article with a powerful conclusion. Therefore, it can be said in conclusion that this article is useful because it brings to the fore issues that may not be given enough thought in society today. I believe that this article does a good job of highlighting these issues and educating the reader in what could be done and what every person in society could do to help eliminate the social idea of what disability is. I think that one of the particular strengths of this article is Penny Peppers real life experiences of the challenges that disabled people face every day and what the responsibility of society is in the hope for progress as the years progress. For these reasons I think it can be said that this is a strong article with both well researched information and that is directed at the right audience. Word Count 1960 References Bagenstos, S. (2009). Law and the contradictions of the disability rights movement. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp.146-150. Garland-Thomson, R. (2002). Integrating Disability, Transforming Feminist Theory. NWSA Journal, [online] 14(3), pp.1-32. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/37970/summary [Accessed 13 Mar. 2017]. Pepper, P. (2016). Turning Paralympians into superhumans is no help to disabled people. The Guardian. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/06/paralympians-superhumans-disabled-people [Accessed 14 Mar. 2017]. Quarmby, K. (2012). Scapegoat. 1st ed. London: Portobello, pp.30-33. Rhodes, P., Nocon, A., Small, N. and Wright, J. (2008). Disability and identity: the challenge of epilepsy. Disability Society, 23(4), pp.385-395. Sawadsri, A. (2012). Do I Look Like an Object? A Quest of Exploring Person Place Relationship of Disabling. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, [online] 50, pp.418-428. Available at: http://research.ncl.ac.uk/forum/v10i1/4_Antika.pdf [Accessed 15 Mar. 2017]. Wilsonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ Kovacs, D., Ryan, M., Haslam, S. and Rabinovich, A. (2008). Just because you can get a wheelchair in the building doesnt necessarily mean that you can still participate: barriers to the career advancement of disabled professionals. Disability Society, [online] 23(7), pp.705-717. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09687590802469198 [Accessed 13 Mar. 2017]. Wolbring, G. (2016). Employment, Disabled People and Robots: What Is the Narrative in the Academic Literature and Canadian Newspapers?. Societies, 6(2), p.15.

Analysis of the Warehouse Automation Failure at Sainsbury’s

Abstract All organizational departments play a collective role in ensuring that the intended goals and targets are achieved. It is vital that they work together because the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Because of the connection that exists amongst different departments, failure in one department may have a detrimental effect to the entire organization. In this regard, this report addresses the case of warehouse failure at Sainsbury’s. It provides an in-depth discussion of the failure and utilizes Porter’s value chain analysis model to explore how failures in primary and supporting activities from the model might have contributed to this. Introduction One of the responsibilities of managers is ensuring that all components or departments within the organization work effectively. This is because success in organization is dependent on the contributions made by different departments. There have been several cases where failure in a single department has adversely affected all operations of the company. This paper seeks to address this management issue by focusing on the failures that occurred in the warehouse automation strategy at Sainsbury’s in 2004 (Double Loop, 2013). It is based on the view that there are many operational failures or disasters occur due to managers’ lack of understanding about the whole organization. This leads to problems in the synchronization of different organizational functions. An Overview of Sainsbury’s Sainsbury’s is one of the largest supermarket chains in the United Kingdom, with a current market share of 17.7%. Apart from running the supermarket business, the brand also deals in the banking and property industries. Since it was founded in 1869, the company has undergone a phenomenal growth. Currently, it runs more than 1,106 convenience stores and supermarkets, and has more than 150,000 employees. The company operates both as a wholesaler and as a retailer (Sainsbury’s, 2014). It has stores that comprise of supermarkets, convenience stores, and pharmacies. In the supermarkets’ category, the company runs Sainsbury’s cafe and Sainsbury’s fuel. It also has an online business referred to as Sainsbury’s online, and comprises of Sainsbury’s Energy, Entertainment, Compare and Save, and Sainsbury’s gift cards. There are also banking and mobile businesses that are run by the company. Even with this level of success that the company presently enjoys, it has also undergone a number of challenges, some of which have led to heavy losses. Key among these was the warehouse project failure in 2004 (O’Brien, 2004). Warehouse automation failure at Sainsbury’s The warehouse automation project commenced in 2000 and had originally been meant to improve the efficiency of the company’s supply chain. The project was under the â€Å"business transformation programme†, whose key planks were Electronic Point Sale (EPOS), supply chain management, and outsourcing of its IT projects to Accenture. The warehouse automation project was intended to overhaul and improve supply chain management of the company. The company had originally intended to make installations of automated fulfilment systems in one of its distribution centres, Waltham Point in Essex. This is the company’s biggest depot, and distributes stock around London and southeast England. By implementation of a barcode based fulfilment system though this project, it was projected that it could make the company’s warehousing operations more streamlined and efficient (Double Loop, 2013). Three years into the launch of the business transformation programme, the CEO who had launched the project reported that it was on the right track, and had saved the whole organization a total amount of ?700 million. However, it was later realized that automation system had developed technical issues, mainly errors in reading barcodes. Not only did this failure affect the company’s operations, it also caused contractual rows between Sainsbury’s and Accenture, financial losses and undue attention from media. With reference to O’Brien (2004), implementation of this project led to a pre-tax loss of ?39 million in the first half of 2004, the worst that the company had ever recorded in its 139 years of operation. This also made the company lose ground to its competitors in the market, which included Asda and Tesco (Double Loop, 2013).Causes of the failureThis failure can be attributed to several management issues in the company. One of these was the situation on whic h IT projects, which were to facilitate the automation project, were outsourced to another company (Abdullah & Verner, 2012). Even though the company being outsourced to might have had a good reputation in implementing such projects, the lack of involvement by parent company managers in the monitoring and evaluation of the project can affect the attainment of the intended objective (Alexander & Walker, 2013). The minimal involvement by Sainsbury’s management in this project explains why it took three years and a change in leadership to realize that the project was not likely to attain its set objectives (Alexander & Walker, 2013). Another possible cause, which has also been identified by Double Loop (2013) is that there was insufficient engagement between the company’s CEO and its IT suppliers in projecting the possible key business and IT risks. For this reason, no delivery strategy that could tackle these challenges was promptly designed (Chermack, 2011). This can also be considered as the lack of sufficient preparations by the then CEO (Sir Peter Davis) before the initiation of the project. Insufficient preparation exposes projects to the risk of possible failure and over-expenditure (Kardes et al., 2013). There was also a communication problem, which can be mainly blamed on Sir Peter Davis. Whereas it must have been known to him that the project could probably fail to serve its intended objective, his presentation about the project to the public was that its progress was as planned and that by 2003, it had saved the company ?700 million. Had the issues been frankly and promptly pointed out, necessary measures could have been undertaken to avert the heavy loss that was later incurred (Aula & Siira, 2010). Given that this failure was associated with the warehouse automation exercise at Sainsbury’s warehouse automation project, it is also worth noting that the failure might have been partly caused by automation challenges. The fact that automated system failed to operate as it was intended to, indicates that all the inputs in terms of time, money and resources were lost (Kardes et al., 2013). Porter’s Value chain Analysis of the Failure Porter’s value chain model can be used to identify the primary and supporting activities which contributed to the failure at Sainsbury’s According to Porter (1985), generic value added activities can be divided into two. These are primary activities and support activities. Primary activities comprise of inbound and outbound logistics, sales and marketing, services and operations. Supporting activities, on the other hand, comprise of firm infrastructure, senior management roles, internal culture, procurement, outsourcing and technological developments. The model is represented in the diagram below, in which the functions that contributed to the failure at Sainsbury’s have been marked. Fig. 1: Sainsbury’s value chain components that contributed to the failure in warehouse automation The functions marked in the value chain model above have been identified as the contributors towards the identified failure. They are explained in more detail below: Outbound logistics: in the value chain, outbound logistics are referred to as activities that mainly relate to transference of goods to customers through warehousing. The automation of the warehouse at Sainsbury’s was being done so as to facilitate this primary activity in the organization. The failure of the warehouse automation to effectively take place thus affected the activities in outbound logistics (Zott et al., 2011). Senior management Roles: There was a failure by the senior management, led by the company’s CEO to effectively make an exhaustive plan of the warehouse automation project, which could have identified the potential risks and contributed to the formulation of possible strategies to overcome these challenges (Kardes et al., 2013). Another failure by the management was in terms of their involvement in the implementation of the project, only to identify issues three years after implementation of the project (Double Loop, 2013). Internal Communications: This function refers to how effectively and accurately information is passed within the organizational precinct (Wright, 2012). The failure was due to the miscommunication by the CEO, where he purported that the project was on the right track and had in fact saved the company a reasonable amount of money. This shows that he was either being given the wrong information by the contractor company or he was presenting wrong information about the project. Technology developments: It has to be acknowledged that the company’s agenda was to improve its service delivery to its customers through technological innovation. However, given that the entire automation project failed to materialize, it can be argued that there was a technological development failure. According to Porter’s (1985) model, technological development comprises of all activities that relate to the processing and management of information. It also involves the activities undertaken in ensuring that the organization keeps up with the latest technological changes. Outsourcing: The IT automation project was undertaken by Accenture, an outsourced IT company, which failed to deliver the intended automation results, and ultimately led to the cancellation of the contract (Double Loop, 2013). Conclusion This paper has presented a case of warehouse automation failure at Sainsbury’s in 2004. With the help of the Porter’s value chain model, several primary and supporting activities that might have contributed to the failure have been identified. The identified primary activities are inbound logistics and outbound logistics. Supporting activities are outsourcing, technology developments, internal communications and senior management roles. The fact that all these activities affected and were also affected by the warehouse automation failure at Sainsbury’s proves that many operational failures or disasters that occur because there is lack of understanding of the whole organization, resulting in problems in the synchronization of different organizational functions. References Alexander, A. & Walker, H., 2013. Sustainable supply chain management: towards a systems theory perspective. Dublin: EUROMA conference. Double Loop, 2013. Sainsbury’s Warehouse Automation Project. [Online] Available at:http://www.doubleloopconsulting.com/sainsbury-warehouse-automation [Accessed 6 March 2014]. Kardes, I., Ozturk, A., Cavusgil, S.T. & Cavusgil, E., 2013. Managing global megaprojects: Complexity and risk management. International Business Review, 22(6), pp.905-17. O’Brien, L., 2004. Digital disaster. [Online] Available at:http://www.supplymanagement.com/analysis/features/2004/digital-disaster/ [Accessed 6 March 2014]. Porter, M., 1985. Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press. Sainsbury’s, 2014. About us. [Online] Available at: http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/about-us/ [Accessed 6 March 2014]. Zott, C., Amit, R. & Massa, L., 2011. The business model: recent developments and future research. Journal of Management , 37(4), pp.1019-42. Abdullah, L.M. & Verner, J.M., 2012. Analysis and application of an outsourcing risk framework. Journal of Systems and Software, 85(8), pp.1930-52. Aula, P. & Siira, K., 2010. Organizational Communication and Conflict Management Systems: A Social Complexity Approach. Nordicom Review, 31, pp.125-41. Chermack, T.J., 2011. Scenario Planning in Organizations. California: Berrett-Koehler. Wright, M., 2012. Gower Handbook of Internal Communication. Burlington: Gower Publishing.

Assess the contribution of Social Action Theory to sociology Essay

Social Action Theorists, or Interactionists are also known as micro sociologists, this is because instead of looking at the bigger picture in society, and how the large structures and institutions such as the education and judiciary systems affect individuals, which is what Marxists and Functionalists (macro sociologists) look at, Social Action Theorists look at the opposite, how us, individuals, act by our own accord, and how we make up society. This is known as a ‘bottom up’ view of society. They see people as having a much more active role in society, as opposed to the passive puppets that Structuralists make us out to be. They reject the view that our behaviour is the product of these organisations and structure. Although Social Action Theorists do look very much as individual behaviour, they also take into account the fact that we are aware of the people around us, they argue that our behaviour is influenced by how other individuals react to us and behave, so society is made up because people come together and interact. We are able to react to each other’s behaviour in this way because we have learnt how to expect what people should and shouldn’t do, and how to interpret behaviour. We have meanings for various symbols during interactions, for example, someone frowning may show confusion or anger, and someone swearing with a hand gesture may be insulting, because of these codes and symbols, we are able to anticipate behaviour, and judge how people are feeling. This also gives us a knowledge about what behaviour is and isn’t appropriate in certain situations. These different situations can also affect how we behave and what behaviour is acceptable, for example shouting and swearing may be seen as acceptable at a football match, but this would be highly inappropriate in the middle of a supermarket or library. These behaviours and expected ways of carrying ourselves, or norms and values, (especially the basic ones, such as how to act around others) are learnt from the family at a young age. However education teaches us how to act in a larger range of social situations. The acquiring of this knowledge is what leads to us gaining our identity. Social action theorists suggest that there are three main parts to our identity. The first of these parts is the things that make us individual, such as name, signature and photograph. The second aspect is social identity, which is made up of the personality characteristics that are associated with our role in society. For example, I am seen as an older brother, which society may make me out to be annoying and protective of my younger sibling, but I am also seen as a student, who is perceived to be hard-working and well-behaved. The final part of our identity is the concept of ‘self’, or what we think of ourselves, and how we think we play our respective roles. This concept of ‘self’ has been developed further by social action theorists, who believe that this can be further broken down into two components, the ‘I’ and the ‘me’. The ‘I’ is the private inner self, what we truly think of ourselves, whereas ‘me’ is the social self, and is the one that carries out the roles of brother and student. Goffman referred to society as a play, and that we are all as individuals, actors in this play, or in the drama of everyday life. The expected ways of behaving, or social norms are the script, for example, greeting someone with ‘Good morning’ is expected. He suggests that the roles we carry out are simply a performance designed to create a particular impression. For example in front of grandparents, I put on this performance of being exceptionally well mannered (believe it or not). Another part of social action theory is the concept of labelling. This is when someone is put into a group, or stereotyped, because of the way they look or act. For example a young person may be labelled as a ‘goth’ because they have pale skin, black hair, and listen to a certain type of music. Becker came up with the idea of a Master Status. This means that an individual can have a status (normally negative) which overrides all other labels. For example, someone may be a very good brother and son, but then may be arrested for robbery, and then the label of ‘criminal’ will become his master status, and people won’t see the brother or the son they saw before, they will simply see him as a criminal. It is believed that these labels lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. This means that someone will react to the label they have been given, and this label will become true. For example, if a teacher (very wrongly) labels a student as ‘dumb’ they may think they genuinely are dumb, and will not do well at school. However it has been argued that the opposite can occur, and people may go out of their way to disprove their label, to carry on with the example before, the ‘dumb’ student may try exceptionally hard at home and at school, to prove the teacher wrong, the label may act as motivation. There are many criticisms of Social Action Theory, one being that they tend to be very vague when describing who is responsible for creating these norms and values, and interpretations that mean we know how to act around people and in certain situations. They fail to explain power, and factors which may affect these norms such as class or gender.

How to Write an Essay an Ultimate Guide

Essays are probably the most common task you are going to encounter in your academic career. They often come up as class and homework assignments in middle and high school and are always used as a part of college admission process: you are going to write them throughout college and, depending on the career you choose, – as a part of your academic work. What we are getting at is this – if you learn how to write essays properly early on, you are going to save yourself a great deal of time, effort and nerve cells. Source: http://waveavenue.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/essay-writing.jpg Choosing the Topic for Your Essay The first step of writing an essay is, naturally, deciding what you are going to write about. Unfortunately, you are not always given this opportunity; nevertheless, even when the topic is predetermined, it is often possible to nudge it a little bit in a more desired direction without making it look too far-fetched. If you are given a free reign in this matter, it is at the same time easier and much harder. Easier because you can choose the topic that would ideally fit you; harder because the agony of choosing can be really painful and paralyzing than even the least interesting topic. So, what are the best options you have? Something you are genuinely interested about. It is the best possible approach – when your involvement with the subject goes way beyond the school curriculum, it, on the one hand, makes writing much easier and more enjoyable and, on the other hand, does wonders for the quality of the final product. Something you know well. You may not be particularly interested in the topic but, for some reason, know a lot about it. You won’t have to dive into textbooks for every other sentence but will have your own opinion on the subject from the get-go – it’s a great chance to show off your knowledge. Something you can consult somebody about. If you know somebody who can and will give you some first-hand knowledge of the subject – go for it. For example, if you have to write about the challenges of healthcare system and have a relative who is a doctor, he/she may provide you with invaluable information on the subject. Preparation Many beginners tend to downplay or outright omit this stage. It is true, when the deadline is looming close and there is a lot of work to do, it is terribly tempting to just cut to the chase and conserve time and effort. In reality, however, the result will often be diametrically opposite – you will spend hours writing, crossing out, rewriting, suddenly remembering that you’ve forgotten to mention something at the start and now have to restructure the entire thing for it to ever make any sense. Therefore – preparation is crucial and should constitute the majority of your work on an essay, like here: Depending on how much time you have, preparation may include the following stages: Early start. The earlier you start thinking about the topic of your essay, even prior to actual research and information gathering, the higher is the possibility of you stumbling on some useful fact or another in an unexpected place: on TV, in a conversation, etc. Asset evaluation. Jot down everything you know about the topic. Mark the areas where you need additional data. Remember all the competent people you can consult on the topic. Prepare the set of questions you need answered. This will make search for information much easier. Information gathering. Look for relevant information in all available sources: libraries, the Internet, among your acquaintances and so on. Keep notes and don’t overdo things – when you feel you know enough, it is enough. Also, make sure you record all your sources. Formulate your thesis statement. What is the main point you want to make? Select one to three most important ideas supporting your topic and make sure you have facts, statistics or logical proof to back them up. In other words, thesis statement is a short summary of what you are going to talk about in the essay and why. Plan your essay. Write down, in short, what you are going to write about in each part of your essay – we will talk more about it when describing specific parts of the essay. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1KbANXoWlo Writing an Introduction In the most basic terms, every essay consists of three parts: introduction, body and conclusion. Of these three, the writers usually pay the greatest attention to the body, dealing with both introduction and conclusion in a couple of off-hand sentences. Big mistake! Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN6IOSMviS4 Introduction is as important as the body, probably even more. Its work is to produce the precious first impression on the reader and decide whether he/she is going to be interested in what you have to say from the get-go – or will be prepared to read yet another boring piece of mediocre writing. And although your teacher or professor will probably read it to the end (it’s their job, after all), the first impression might be spoiled. In order to avoid this, you should follow several simple rules: Make sure your introduction starts with an attention grabber or ‘hook’. The first sentence should glue the reader’s attention and make him/her want to read on. It may be a shocking statistic or a fact, a controversial or an outrageous statement, a quote – or anything else that would make them want to know what you are going to say next. Don’t forget to state the main idea or thesis of your essay, preferably as the last sentence of the introduction. Be sure to logically connect the ‘hook’ to the thesis and the thesis to the body of the essay. Avoid fillers. It is a good rule to remember in general, but doubly so in introduction – it should be short and snappy. Avoid generalizations and clichà ©s. There is nothing more depressing than reading yet another essay starting with â€Å"Few people know†, â€Å"Since the beginning of time† or something equally bland. Body Paragraphs: Structure Body is the meat of the essay – it is where you express all your thoughts and try to prove your point to the reader. However, it doesn’t mean that you should simply pile everything together and leave the reader to make some kind of sense of it. First and foremost, the body should be properly organized. In most cases, one paragraph equals one point. Thus, each paragraph is dedicated to a particular point you’ve selected during the preparation phase: you introduce it, follow it up with some supporting evidence, answer possible counter-arguments if necessary, and conclude the paragraph with a logical bridge that connects it with the next point, covered in another paragraph. If a point is too big to be expressed in a reasonably-sized paragraph, divide it into several sub-points– just make sure each of them constitutes a fairly independent logical unit properly connected with the rest of the body. Body Paragraphs: How to Write But what, exactly, does one write in body paragraphs? It is hugely dependent on the essay type, but there are some guidelines that are more or less universal. Be specific. Depending on the essay type, you may be expected to bring up factual evidence, statistics or logical conclusions. Irrespectively of an essay type, however, you should avoid one and the same thing: vague generalities not supported by evidence. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfVQjLFidjE Avoid using personal pronouns unless it is specifically stated in requirements (recounting a personal experience without ever using â€Å"I† may be awkward). If you cannot support an idea with evidence, don’t use it at all. When using a source, always credit it and make sure you do it according to the accepted citation format. Don’t ‘forget’ to mention facts that seem to disprove or challenge your claims. This trick will be obvious for anybody more or less familiar with the topic in question and is only going to present you in unfavorable light. Make sure to properly connect one paragraph to another. Words like but, however, despite, for example, therefore, as a result, thus, similarly, moreover and suchlike serve exactly this purpose; more elaborate constructions are also possible. Make sure all your points support your main idea and go well with each other. If there is a brilliant point to be made about the topic, but it doesn’t exactly have anything to do with your thesis statement or looks really out of place when compared with other points, it may be better to drop it entirely. Don’t use plagiarism – which sort of goes without saying, but still. Writing a Conclusion Ironically, it is the conclusion that allows the most freedom, for there are basically no rules that set in stone the way it should be written. Basically you should make sure you drive your point home one last time, and it doesn’t matter how you do it as long as you do it effectively. However, if you have no ideas for a creative conclusion, you may use one of well-tested techniques: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvs9IpA5O2s However, it doesn’t mean that you should simply paraphrase your introduction and leave it at that – it is an incredibly lazy approach that isn’t likely to warrant any positive reactions. There are ways to establish the connection with the starting statement in a much more elegant fashion. For example: Use a quotation from one of your sources. Make sure it either amplifies your point or presents it from an unusual angle. Use the starting point to move the discussion to another context. For example, if you discuss immigration policy in Great Britain, you may draw parallels or draw attention to its differences with that in the USA. Consider the implications of your argument. What do the conclusions you’ve made imply or suggest? There are innumerable ways to conclude your essay in a creative way – just keep your eyes open and remember that there are no surefire recipes. General Advice When all is said and done, however, you should remember that despite learning how to write particular parts of an essay can greatly help your technique, knowing them isn’t the same as knowing how to write essays. All elements of essay writing are interconnected and cannot be considered in isolation from one another; at any stage of writing you should keep in mind how it influences all the others: Source: https://graphs.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/infographics-3.png So, here are some points that refer to the process in general: Write the essay in any order that sits well with you. However, the most logical method would be to start with the thesis statement, go on to the body and then, judging from how these two have turned out, think about an interesting introduction and conclusion. Ideally, you should leave your already written essay for at least a day or two before starting to edit it – in this case you will be able to look at it with fresh perspective and notice all the flaws you would’ve otherwise missed. Give the essay to somebody else to read and ask for an objective opinion. A person who doesn’t know the direction in which your thought moved in the process of writing is the best judge of whether your essay is logically sound. What may look perfectly reasonable to you may be incomprehensible for an outsider. Even if you are tempted, don’t exceed the word limit. There is always something you can omit without any negative consequences. Use mind mapping – this popular technique can help you organize your thoughts and quickly remember what refers to what. And finally – no matter how many guides and tips on essay writing you read (and even learn by heart), nothing is going to replace good old practice. The best way to write better essays is to write bad essays until they start getting better and better – so close this guide and go write your essay. Now!