Does your paper have a clear rational structure?

(i) Within each paragraph, is it clearwhat the main point is that the

paragraph makes? Is it clear how you supportthis main point by argument or illustrate it by examples?

(ii) In the paper as a whole,

doesthe layout of paragraphs and their relation to one anotherfollow a logical constructive sequence? Is it made clearwhich are the key
passages of argument? Isthe paper a mere list, or sequence oftopics; orworse, a mere list or sequence of readingsthat have been
summarized?

3. Understanding of arguments

(1) Do you understand the arguments actually dealt with in your paper? Are the key

concepts adequately explained, or ifthey are themselves unclear, isthe vagueness clearly pointed out? Are there good examples or
illustrations to indicate a sure grasp of arguments and distinctions posed? Isthe language you use clear, direct, accurate and sure, or is
itvague, obscure, ambiguous and unsure? In a word (or two) do you bluff and waffle yourway through essays?

(ii) Is it only the simpler

argumentsthat are understood? Are possible objectionsto your arguments considered, or are your points made as ifthey are unanswerable
and left at that? If you are criticizing anotherwriter’s views, do you show you are aware of how your criticism might be answered? There
will not be space to pursue all arguments and counter-arguments through to the end. You should, however, be able to present some degree of

critical exchange ofviews, of argument, objection, repIy,. . . etc.

4. Critical Thinking

Doesthe paper represent your own attempt

to come to grips with the problem or sort outthe issues? Have you analyzed the problem yourself, or merely uncritically accepted someone
else’s analysis? There is obviously no reason why you shouldn’t use someone else’s analysis: but be quite clear that this is what you are
doing, and bear in mind that ev ery theory has its problems and weaknesses.